Women now occupy the top spokesperson jobs in the White House and three key government agencies after President Trump chose Sarah Huckabee Sanders to replace Sean Spicer as press secretary.
The top press secretary positions at the White House, the State Department, the Pentagon, and the Justice Department are all held by women.

Sanders served as the White House’s deputy press secretary before her predecessor Sean Spicer resigned from the position following Trump’s decision to hire Anthony Scaramucci as the White House Communications Director.

Sanders unofficially auditioned for the role when she filled in for Spicer at the daily press briefings. Spicer had to take time off to fulfill his U.S. Navy reserve duties.

She held most of the daily briefings after the White House communications shop decided to ban video cameras from the press briefings.

Sanders joins a team of three other female officials who hold the top communications jobs at the State Department, the Justice Department, and the Pentagon.

Heather Nauert started as the State Department’s spokesperson in April, Sarah Isgur Flores serves as the Justice Department’s director of public affairs, and Dana W. White works as the Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs

Like this:

With the Trinity Lutheran decision offered by the Supreme Court yesterday, we officially reached the end of an era.

That case was the last one the Obama Administration took any part in, having filed an amicus brief to the court supporting the state of Missouri’s decision to withhold funds from the Christian school. The decision, which was overwhelmingly in favor of the school and not the government, is the last beatdown Obama’s administration will receive from the court.

And boy did it receive some beatings.

Overall, Epstein and Posner found, Presidents and government agencies prevailed in about two-thirds of all cases, giving credence to the saying that “when the president goes to court, he wins.”

Except when that President is Barack Obama. Obama’s win rate wasn’t just significantly lower than other administrations, it was the lowest surveyed. The Obama administration won just 50.5 percent of its Supreme Court cases, according to the study.

How does this compare to other recent presidents?

Where the Reagan administration was victorious in the Supreme Court 75 percent of the time, that rate dropped to 70 percent for George Bush (the first), 63 percent for Clinton, and 60 percent for George W. Bush.

What’s more, the executive win rate dropped between terms as well. Clinton performed better in 1994 than he did in 1998, for example. George W. Bush won more his first four years than his second.

Therefore, one could argue that Barack Obama’s administration is the most unconstitutional administration in history. It’s not like we needed the empirical evidence to back us up on that, but it sure as hell is nice to have some vindication on that, isn’t it?

Obama did himself no favors with the nation’s highest court from the very beginning, though. Verbally calling them out in a State Of The Union address was a clear signal that he expected them to go along with him, while also hinting that he would proceed with or without them. Despite his warnings, the then-president also received more unanimous decisions against him than any other president in history.

Of course, this means absolutely nothing to the Democrats, who will absolutely ignore SCOTUS decisions when they don’t like them. They are so bad about doing that, as I mentioned yesterday, the Supreme Court had to target liberal activist groups with specific phrasing in their decision on Trump’s travel ban.

Now, there is a catch here – the Supreme Court appears to be trending away from presidents since Reagan. That means that Donald Trump could be looking at his most hostile court yet, despite a conservative majority. Conservatives who oppose Trump have expressed their concerns with some of his rhetoric bordering on the authoritarian, and that is something the court, conservative or no, is not going to go along with.

As has been said time and again, however, predicting what the Supreme Court will do is pretty much impossible. Determining if they’ll trend away from or more toward a president is a pointless analysis.

What we do know is that Trump is going to have some legal battles ahead of him. The travel ban will be heard in full this autumn, and liberal activist groups will be looking for anything and everything to challenge him on in the courts. The Supreme Court could be his last line of defense… or, it could be his downfall.

Like this:

The family of a high school student fears he will not survive injuries sustained last Wednesday after school resource officers Tazed him, the family’s attorney has stated.

17-year-old Noe Nino de Rivera is in critical condition at St. David’s Medical Center in Austin, Texas, after he was alleged to have interfered with two sheriff’s deputies working as resource officers, who were attempting to break up a fight between two female students.

The Cedar Creek High School student fell and hit the front of his head when one of the officers, Randy McMillan, used a Taser to subdue him. He sustained a traumatic brain injury, one of the worst his family’s attorney, Adam Loewy, says he’s witnessed in his legal career.

“This is one of the worst traumatic brain injuries we have seen and we will be pursuing all legal remedies at the proper time,” Loewy told KXAN.

He told the Austin American Statesman that if de Rivera “does recover, or survive, he will absolutely not be the same person. It’s just a terrible, terrible tragedy.”

A spokeswoman for the sheriff’s department says the Cedar Creek High School student moved aggressively, did not respond to orders and “looked as though he was ready to fight.”

Several students, however, say de Rivera did nothing to deserve being Tased, and Lowey says he has video evidence to this effect.

“I do not believe for a second that he was being aggressive,” Loewy stated, pointing to cell phone footage he says proves de Rivera was not the aggressor. “This officer was way out of control.”

“There were two young ladies fighting and he stepped in to break up the fight,” Loewy explained to KXAN. “What the evidence shows, he was sort of backing up from the fight, the fight was over, and this officer literally walked up on him and Tased him.”

The sheriff’s spokeswoman says they also have video of the incident, and it proves officers were in the right. “He’s being aggressive. He is not complying with any of the verbal orders,” Bastrop County Sheriff’s spokeswoman Sissy Jones told MyFoxAustin. “One of the officers puts his hand on de Rivera’s chest and says, you need to back up and that’s when de Rivera hits the officer’s hand.”

“Totally false, a complete lie,” Loewy says. ”You see the back of the officers come up and you see Noe facing them and then you see the taser go.”

Students at the high school staged a walk-out Friday morning, in which they chanted “Justice for Noe” and carried signs reading “#PrayForNoe,” and protested the use of Tazers in schools.

According to Jones, Rivera could face charges of interference with public duties, resisting arrest, search or transport, and assault should he survive his injuries.

“Those charges are a joke,” Loewy told Fox news, adding, “and I really hope they try to indict a kid who’s in a coma.”

An independent investigation by the district attorney has been launched, in addition to an internal investigation over the incident. Loewy is also calling for a Texas Ranger and federal government investigation of the case.

Officer McMillan remains on duty, though he’s been transferred to a different department.

Outside of the United States, where the idea of self-ownership and the natural right of self-defense is at best a dismal concept, members of the corporatized media are calling for armed intervention to put an end to the Second Amendment.

“But what if we no longer thought of this as just a problem for America and, instead, viewed it as an international humanitarian crisis – a quasi civil war, if you like, that calls for outside intervention?” writes Henry Porter of the London Observer. “As citizens of the world, perhaps we should demand an end to the unimaginable suffering of victims and their families – the maiming and killing of children – just as America does in every new civil conflict around the globe.”

Mr. Porter proudly notes that Britons long ago dispensed with English Common Law – apparently including its precedent, the Magna Carta – and insists that the right to bear arms is an antiquated idea akin to holding slaves.

“Half the country is sane and rational while the other half simply doesn’t grasp the inconsistencies and historic lunacy of its position, which springs from the second amendment right to keep and bear arms, and is derived from English common law and our 1689 Bill of Rights,” he writes. “We dispensed with these rights long ago, but American gun owners cleave to them with the tenacity that previous generations fought to continue slavery.”

Maybe the United Nations can be sent in to disarm the irrational rustics. “This has reached the point where it has ceased to be a domestic issue. The world cannot stand idly by.”

If Mr. Porter had it his way he’d deploy a United Nations force of armed military personnel to the United States for the sole purpose of disarming law abiding Americans.

What Mr. Porter apparently doesn’t understand is that the Second Amendment is the very backstop for people like him, who would violate the natural laws of self preservation and property rights by use of force.

Rather than claiming that we fight for our right to bear arms with the tenacity of slave owners, I like to think we fight for this right with the same tenacity that we fought British imperial rule in the late 1700′s. But Mr. Porter didn’t want to make that analogy, for obvious reasons.

Mr. Porter, I will be the very first American to surrender my weapon to you… from my cold dead heads.

My good friend and Army veteran Ed Thomas who has spent many months in a war zone, and who is also the editor of The Daily Sheeple, has a similar message, and one he recently tattooed on his arm expressly for the purpose of informing people like Mr. Porter and other world citizens who have any skewed ideas about how easy such a gun grab might be:

Last Friday, the city council of Berkeley, California, voted to keep mercury hidden in dental fillings, keeping consumers in the dark on the fact that they are all being poisoned with a deadly neurotoxin that causes permanent brain damage. This decision to keep consumers in the dark was, of course, supported by dentists and doctors — both of which have a long history of covertly poisoning their own patients while refusing to disclose the damaging effects of the deadly chemicals or toxic heavy metals they routinely (and profitably) use.

Image: Dentist.

It turns out that “amalgam fillings” are intentionally and deliberately misnamed for the express purpose of misleading consumers. Those fillings are actually more than 50 percent mercury, and once installed in mouths, they off-gas mercury vapor which is then inhaled by the patient, entering their bloodstream and causing permanent cellular damage to heart, kidneys, liver and brain. Click here to see a video of mercury fillings off-gassing deadly mercury vapor.

There’s also a stunning video from the University of Calgary that provides visual proof of mercury damaging brain neurons. If you’ve never seen this video, click here to watch it now.

Here’s why so many dentists are clinically insane

The dentistry industry knows that mercury is extremely toxic. It’s one of the reasons why so many dentists are clinically insane. They’ve come into contact with so much mercury of the years that they, themselves, are victims of it. That’s why so many retired dentists are stark raving mad. The “mad hatter” effect is what happens when you touch, absorb or inhale too much mercury over the years.

So instead of trying to remove mercury from fillings — which would be the obvious solution here — the dental industry has, for decades, engaged in a delusional campaign of denial, pretending that mercury fillings are somehow not toxic. Could this be because the dental industry organizations also happen to own patents on mercury fillings and earn huge revenues every time one is purchased for use on a child?

Yet even in their absurd denial of the toxicity of mercury, mainstream dentists and poison pushers forget yet another critical aspect of all this: the environmental damage caused by mercury used in dentistry.

Mercury-based dentistry is destroying our world

Thanks to modern dentistry, mercury is “the poison that keeps on giving.” Even after poisoning the patient, that same mercury goes on to poison the world. How?

Cremation.

When people who have mercury fillings die, many are cremated. This causes the mercury in their mouths to be “cooked off” and turned into a deadly gas that gets blown right into the atmosphere. Mainstream environmentalists are quite familiar with the idea of mercury being released by coal power plants, but almost nobody talks about mercury being released from the cremation of patients who have been implanted with mercury fillings.

This mercury gets blown by trade winds and eventually settles on crop lands all across America. From there, it enters the food, causing trace levels of mercury to be found across the food supply. This is just one of the many ways in which modern dentistry is poisoning our world.

Mercury used in fertilizers for food

Believe it or not, mercury is also found in biosludge (human waste) fertilizers that are routinely spread on crops grown in the USA and elsewhere. This is a common but little-known practice in the food production industry.

The EPA openly confirms this, by the way, stating, “if mercury-contaminated sludge is used as an agricultural fertilizer, some of the mercury used as fertilizer may also evaporate to the atmosphere. Through precipitation, this airborne mercury eventually gets deposited onto water bodies, land and vegetation.”

Just how big of a problem is this? According to the EPA, over 30 tons of mercury were used in dental fillings in 2004. Dental offices are also polluting the world with mercury through improper disposal of mercury-contaminated devices and supplies. As the EPA states on its dental amalgam page:

If the amalgam waste is sent to a landfill, the mercury may be released into the groundwater or air. If the mercury is incinerated, mercury may be emitted to the air from the incinerator stacks. And finally, if mercury-contaminated sludge is used as an agricultural fertilizer, some of the mercury used as fertilizer may also evaporate to the atmosphere. Through precipitation, this airborne mercury eventually gets deposited onto water bodies, land and vegetation. Some dentists throw their excess amalgam into special medical waste (“red bag”) containers, believing this to be an environmentally safe disposal practice. If waste amalgam solids are improperly disposed in medical red bags, however, the amalgam waste may be incinerated and mercury may be emitted to the air from the incinerator stacks. This airborne mercury is eventually deposited into water bodies and onto land. Mercury amalgam also accumulates on dental supplies, such as cotton swabs and gauze, and these materials are usually deposited in the regular trash. In local areas where trash is incinerated, the mercury in this trash can be released via air emissions.

Mercury denialists, poison pushers and destroyers of life

The mercury denialists are all the usual suspects. They are the very same destroyers of life who are also pushing GMOs, vaccines, psychiatric drugs and other poisons that are destroying our world. These very same people insist that mercury is somehow not toxic to humans, nor to the environment, nor to any life on our planet.

Of course, they know they’re lying about mercury, just as they’re lying about GMOs, vaccines, psychiatric drugs, glyphosate, triclosan, aspartame and all the other poisons now devastating our world.

It’s time to stop the dentistry holocaust and outlaw the use of mercury in both dentistry and medicine. Mercury has no place whatsoever in the dental practices of a civilized society. We have suffering mercury poisoning for too many generations, and We the People will no longer tolerate the denials of a corrupt, profiteering industry that earns money by installing neurotoxic substances into the mouths of children.

What you can do to stop the dentistry holocaust

Join Natural News in halting this modern-day holocaust:

#1) Demand mercury-free dentistry for yourself and your family members. If your current dentist still uses mercury, switch dentists.

#2) Demand that your representatives in government support legislative bans on mercury in dentistry and vaccines.

#3) If you currently have mercury in your mouth, have it removed by a competent holistic dentist. Please note that you will need to consume extra nutritional supplements before and after any mercury removal procedure to protect your body from absorbing the mercury. Most importantly, you will need an oxygen respirator during the procedure to avoid inhaling mercury vapor as the fillings are being drilled out! If your dentist does not give you a respirator during this procedure, refuse to work with that dentist, period! (Removing mercury fillings exposes you to very high levels of mercury vapor during the removal.)

#4) Share this story and keep reading Natural News for the truth about mercury, dentistry, vaccines, GMOs and other topics that the mainstream media flat-out refuses to cover.

P.S. There is no “safe” form of mercury, as is sometimes claimed by the poison pushers. Mercury is toxic in all its forms and isotopes. You can speciate mercury all day long, but you’ll never find a form that’s a nutrient. Every form of mercury is poison to life on our planet, without exception! (Ethylmercury, methylmercury, inorganic mercury, etc.) Click here for a great online resource explaining the different “species” of mercury most likely to be encountered.

One of the most important things you can do to stay healthy and feel good is stay hydrated. But in a world where so much of the water is contaminated by pollution or supplemented chemical treatments, it’s difficult to know where to get the best water. A report earlier this year from the Environmental Working Group found that tap water may not be your best bet—determining every water sample they tested, from 201 city water systems in 43 states, was contaminated with “probable human carcinogens.”

Namely chlorine, a disinfecting agent added to water to kill disease-causing microorganisms, is reacting with organic matter like sewage, manure, fallen leaves, and the like, to create potentially toxic and harmful chemicals.

According to the EWG report:

“This unintended side effect of chlorinating water to meet federal drinking water regulations creates a family of chemicals known as trihalomethanes. The Environmental Protection Agency lumps them under the euphemism “disinfection byproducts” but we call them what they are: toxic trash.”

These resulting trihalomethanes are partially regulated by the EPA, but it’s regulation doesn’t do enough. For one, the agency only regulates four members of the trihalomethane family when there are hundreds in the water. And as for these four types of toxic chemicals, regulations still allow their presence in the water at harmful levels.

Numerous studies have found these chemicals to increase the risk of bladder cancer. Right now, the EPA limits the amount of trihalomethanes to 80-parts-per-billion, though research has tied bladder cancer risk to much lower amounts.

For instance, a 2007 study in Spain found exposure to trihalomethanes as low as 35 parts per billion to be associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer. Also in 2007, researchers in Taiwan linked bladder cancer risk with levels of only 21 parts per billion. Of those water systems tested by the EWG, 168 had trihalomethane concentrations greater than 21 parts per billion. In 53% of those tested, the levels were greater than 35 parts per billion.

But, as the EWG reports, “trihalomethanes are just the tip of the iceberg.” More than 600 potentially dangerous chemicals are created when water treatment disinfectants react with pollutants in source water. These contaminants may be linked to birth defects, various forms of cancer, infertility, and more. Fluoride in particular has gained a lot of attention, mainly for it’s ability to reduce IQ.

Another victory has been won in the fight to protect the public against water supplies intentionally poisoned with artificial fluoride chemicals, this time in Woodland, Washington, a city located just 30 miles north of Portland, Oregon. As reported by The Daily News online, the Woodland City Council recently voted 6-to-1 to stop adding synthetic fluoride chemicals to its public water supply after it was determined that the outmoded practice is both unsafe and ineffective.

Following the lead of nearby Portland, which back in May also decided to keep its water supply pure and free of toxic industrial waste, Woodland joins many other scientifically progressive communities across the country that have had enough of all the status quo, pro-fluoride rhetoric. Citing a cohort of peer-reviewed studies and meta-analyses published in recent years, vigilant Woodland residents were able to show the receptive council that artificial fluoride is dangerous, and has no place being added to water.

“I’m against my government medicating me without my consent,” said Terry Day, a local resident, to the council at a recent meeting. Day was one of 20 other local residents who showed up to oppose fluoride — not a single individual in favor of artificial fluoridation showed up to the meeting to defend the practice.

According to reports, all of Woodland’s councilmen had conducted their own research prior to the meeting, and, with the exception of just one, came to the conclusion that fluoridating the water needed to stop. Councilman Ben Fredricks, for instance, expressed that cities have no business adding fluoride chemicals, which are technically a drug, to water supplies without consent.

Adding fluoride “allows decision makers without medical qualifications to do to the whole community what a doctor is not allowed to do to his or her patients,” Fredricks is quoted as saying.

Councilwoman Marilee McCall agrees, having also expressed concerns about fluoride, and particularly its safety when ingested continually over the course of one’s lifetime. She and Fredricks, along with four other council members, voted to give back to the people of Woodland their health freedom and allow individuals to choose whether or not to ingest or use fluoride.

“Everyone has the opportunity to use [fluoride] topically as a toothpaste if they wish,” added Fredricks in his dissent against fluoridation. “Every doctor I go to knows they can’t force a patient to take a medicine without their informed consent.”

A fluoride-free Woodland means less government spending, improved public health

Ending the fluoridation program in Woodland will also result in taxpayer savings of up to $5,000 per year, which is what the city used to spend to truck in the industrial waste and dump it into the water. Contrary to popular myth, the fluoride chemicals added to public water supplies are not natural but rather are derived from industrial processing byproducts, which typically also contain lead, arsenic, mercury, cadmium, radionuclides and other poisonous compounds.

“[E]veryone is free to use fluoride-containing toothpaste, or to add fluoride to their diet,” wrote one commenter on a related article about the decision. “Why compel the entire population, including millions of children, to ingest a substance which is, AT BEST, of unknown toxicity?”

To learn more about the dangers of fluoride, and for information about how you can help get it removed from your local water supply, be sure to check out the Fluoride Action Network:http://www.fluoridealert.org